ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2015
Evaluating patient experience in a cystic fibrosis centre using a disease-specific patient satisfaction questionnaire.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Partnership Enhancement Program: Piloting a Communication Training Program for Cystic Fibrosis Care Teams.Journal of patient experience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledMedical care for persons with chronic diseases like cystic fibrosis (CF) is provided by multi-professional teams. We assessed the patients' perspective of care by reporting the results of two consecutive patient satisfaction surveys performed within a 2-year interval at our CF centre. The newly developed, disease-specific questionnaire for parents and adults had 104 items with up to 6 response categories each. For data analysis, responses were dichotomized into a problem score with 0 % as the ideal result. Adolescents were surveyed using a different questionnaire. Seventy-six and 89 respondents, respectively, took part in the 2009 and 2011 surveys (response rates: 72 to 84 %). In 2009, the ideal problem score of 0 % was reported for 18 and 20 % of all items in adults and parents, respectively. Thirteen items had a problem score >30 %. After the whole team had implemented quality improvement measures, the 2011 survey showed a >10 % decrease in problem scores for 11 and 21 % of items in the adults and parents groups, respectively. Adolescents also reported better experiences in 2011 than in 2009.
conclusionExploring the patients' perspectives aids to identify strengths and weaknesses and helps to provide patient-centred care, which is important for persons with chronic illness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25944680What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.